Welcome to Texas justice: You might beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride.

Thursday, February 18, 2010

New Driver Responsibility rules unveiled today at DPS

Despite recent coverage in the Dallas News declaring proposed amendments to the Driver Responsibility surcharge had been dropped, the Public Safety Commission today will take up proposed revisions to the rules, which haven't yet been publicly released. I'm headed up there to hear the presentation later today on their revised proposal. Here's their meeting agenda (pdf).

UPDATE (5:14): Despite concerns expressed by key commissioners that they were too weak, the Public Safety Commission today approved publication in the Texas Register of a scaled back version of new indigency rules. I couldn't get a copy today, but in the public presentation by Drivers License division chief Michael Kelly, eligibility under today's proposal would be limited to those who:

Are at 125% or below of federal poverty levels

Submit supporting documentation (yet to be determined)

Provide proof of insurance

Make a one-time payment per surcharge owed ($500 for DWI; $250 for no insurance, $150 for no drivers license)

Unfortunately, that's a radically scaled back program compared to what Kelly suggested to the PSC last summer. But commissioners emphasized that they may decide to strengthen the proposal depending on what came out in the public hearing and comment period.

Kelly said the proposal had been revised because the comptroller told them it would not be budget neutral - calculations which to my knowledge have not been made public. I'd really like to see those, because as far as I can tell, collection rates are already so low there's a good chance a broader amnesty program would significantly improve collections.

Right now, DPS collects just 37% of Driver Responsibility surcharges owed, which is actually higher than other states (New Jersey's similar surcharge has a 25% collection rate, the commission was told.) What's more, after several months sending debtor-drivers more strongly worded collections-oriented letters, which had been touted as a way to increase returns, there was no significant increase at all and collection rates remained at 37%, commissioners were told today.

That means that 63% of those owing surcharges (a number which accumulates over time) aren't paying anything at all. If expanding an amnesty program beyond 125% of poverty (as DPS staff suggested last summer) enabled a significant percentage of those folks to pay the reduced fee, that's actually money coming in the door that the state wouldn't otherwise see.

What's more, there's more economic harm done by the surcharge than just to the state budget. Drivers who lose their license because of surcharges can't buy insurance. (Roughly 25% of Texas drivers are uninsured.) So any economic analysis should include on the debit side of the ledger the costs from accidents involving uninsured motorists facing unaffordable surcharges. Ditto for costs to county jails and court for processing the increasingly vast number of no-insurance, no-driver license cases. Taking that factor into account, the cost-benefit analysis becomes a no-brainer.

But whether or not collections increase or decline, in the bigger picture there are many, many other good reasons to aggressively expand an amnesty program beyond the minimalist suggestions released today. It just creates too many problems, as Texas prosecutors have been saying for years. On this question, I happen to agree with Williamson County District Attorney John Bradley, who once wrote that:

Regardless how we measure the program, it is a disaster. It is a taxation masquerading as a public safety initiative. It probably has more negatives (jail, prosecution, uninsured drivers, etc.) than positives (money in the state's coffers). Unfortunately, the costs are hidden in county and city budgets.

Looking atomistically at bottom line revenues for the Driver Responsibility program ignores these broader social costs and the best interests of the public overall. Thankfully, the Commissioners in their discussion seemed to understand that this minimalist approach wouldn't do enough, and openly discussed the possibility of strengthening the rules, depending on the recommendations received in the public hearing.

More on this after I see the actual proposed rules. I'll let folks know when they're posted and the public hearing set, and encourage anyone interested to submit comments or attend the hearing

15 comments:

I have been without my DL since 2004 because of the DRS. I am a single mother of two and simply can't afford to pay the $350.00 a month for 3 years. I DID pay my fines and have not driven at all in the past 6 years. What I don't understand is why can't these expire after so many years OR at least let me do community service to "work" it off? As many others have said this really has ruined my life. I just want to be able to fix it! But the ammount they are asking is well out of my reach. I would be more than happy to pay if it was an ammount I could afford... Like $50-75 a month.

Exactly Christy, Iam also in your situation(7 yrs no tickets, no license), except they want 600/month from me! LETS ALL SHOW UP IN FULL FORCE AT THE PUBLIC HEARING! Thanks Grits for keeping us updated!

WHY can't people be responsible in the first place? Most Texans have to carry extra insurance, which hits their budgets, since these losers won't carry their own insurance? I'm tired of carring these worthless people who are so irresponsible. Every time I do drive I have to worry about being hit by some loser that won't carry car or personal insurance or any type of insurance. Stop the rip off.,....they all have excuses. I have to work and cover my family....make them do the same ....be responsible for a change!

I have a 20 year old son who got a DWI 2 years ago. He has not driven a car since and will not for another couple of years as a student. He uses a State ID rather than a license and does not plan to buy auto insurance while his only ride is by bicycle or as a passenger.

According to this proposal, he would have to purchase insurance? A lack of insurance was never an issue in his case. In order to meet these terms he has to become more indigent by buying a policy he does not need?

Glad you continue to cover this issue. The charge is way out of line and is primarily a tax on people who have low income and no other means of transportation; kinda similar to debtors prison that the founders of Texas prohibited.$3000.00 is simply way out of line for a first offense and no aggravating circumstances. If the State wants to raise money just add to the tax on alcohol or find a way to reach the alcohol distributors--thats were the money is--but also the lobbyists.I agee with John Bradley's comments in your article. Glad you are keeping up this this topic. We all want impaired drivers off the street, but this is not the way to do it. This is just another tax.

Anon. 7:45. It's NOT about having insurance. The surcharges are for accumulation of points. Then, when you can't pay the surcharge, your license is suspended, and no one will SELL you insurance. I don't even live in Texas and I understand the problem. Get a clue why don'tcha? And I just know, here comes the self-righteous bungholes who will tell you, "well if you don't get any tickets you won't have this problem." Join the real world.

I hope that you thank God every day, as I do, that you are able to work and pay your bills and that you have "budget" that meets your needs. Unfortunately, everyone is not that fortunate. Sometimes by their own fault and sometimes by no fault of their own people end up in difficult situations.

The lack of compassion and just plain hostility to people who are less fortunate that many in our society exhibit never ceases to amaze me. We should all remember the old saying: "There but by the grace of God, go I". You may think you can never end up in some of the bad situations you ses others in but you are wrong. Something beyond your control could happen tomorrow and you could lose everything.

Be thankful for what you have and have compassion on those who don't have what you have. I agree that people should be responsible but these outrageous fees amount to just kicking someone when they are down. I wish the people of Texas were better than that, but, the reality is that they are not.

Never been in this situation, personally, but I do hear about the enormous toll these fees and fines can have upon people who are simply trying to get their lives on track. It's too bad that Texas tries to keep people down rather than creating a viable path for recovery.

Is the municipal services corporation now handling the collection of dps surcharges instead of dps? If this is the case, isn't there a conflict of interest since MSC may use information collected from people who are trying to pay their surcharge, to collect for other MSC clients? If the latter is the case, and i don't know if it is, it may result in lower surcharge collections and an exacerbation of an already bad situation. Anyone know?

First, anon 8:04.. that comment to Christy was uncalled for and assuming you are a grown person, you should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself. Second, I am a divorced mother of three, one of whom is disabled, was working full time in the oilfield, and doing my best to take care of my children. I had a joint policy with a long time family friend to save money on the car insurance. I would pay my half to him and he would take that and his half to pay the insurance. We had been doing that for years. He got notice from his family right before one of the payments were to be made, and had to leave on a major family emergency,and he forgot to pay before leaving. I did not even know the payment hadn't been made. I got pulled over on my way to work, and received my first ever ticket. I paid my fine through the county and was told there would be no further fees/fines to pay. A few months later, I got a notice in the mail stating that my license was suspended and I had to pay $260per year for the next three years. My son's disability has become worse and I am no longer able to work as I am his sole caregiver. I cannot afford this expense any longer (our annual income is now $11,160) and losing my ability to drive will be very, very hard on us. We live outside city limits where public transportation is not available. I don't know how I will get my son to his Dr., pharmacy, and meetings, much less fulfilling normal needs. Why on Earth must the punishment be so steep on those who are NOT repeat offenders, were NOT trying to "slide by" the law, and have done the best they can to be a positive, contributing part of society??

Valentin’s day is express approaching links of london across the earth will start stress out about it. Most men, however, delay awaiting the last jiffy to goods their Valentine’s links of london sale. This is because they’re whichever dreamy, languid or don’t have any thoughts to make the day unusual. links of london charms , Valentine’s day is a very painless incident to celebrate. Here are some tips to duck being the average Joe this year! The two most communal gifts on links of london sweetie bracelet day plants and chocolates. These are very common because ladies like chocolate and flora are an image of links of london charm bracelet . It is definitely recommended to give one or, both of these gifts to your female, however, why impede there? baby and flowers certainly the way you feel about your links of London rings. If yes, then maybe this is where you should rest. One of best other idea Links Of London .For example, they, however, give off unimaginable faculty.

"I always tell people interested in these issues that your blog is the most important news source, and have had high-ranking corrections officials tell me they read it regularly."

- Scott Medlock, Texas Civil Rights Project

"a helluva blog"

- Solomon Moore, NY Times criminal justice correspondent

"Congrats on building one of the most read and important blogs on a specific policy area that I've ever seen"

- Donald Lee, Texas Conference of Urban Counties

GFB "is a fact-packed, trustworthy reporter of the weirdness that makes up corrections and criminal law in the Lone Star State" and has "shown more naked emperors than Hans Christian Andersen ever did."

-Attorney Bob Mabry, Conroe

"Grits really shows the potential of a single-state focused criminal law blog"

- Corey Yung, Sex Crimes Blog

"I regard Grits for Breakfast as one of the most welcome and helpful vehicles we elected officials have for understanding the problems and their solutions."

Tommy Adkisson,Bexar County Commissioner

"dude really has a pragmatic approach to crime fighting, almost like he’s some kind of statistics superhero"

- Rob Patterson, The Austin Post"Scott Henson's 'Grits for Breakfast' is one of the most insightful blogs on criminal justice issues in Texas."

- Texas Public Policy Foundation

"Nobody does it better or works harder getting it right"

David Jennings, aka "Big Jolly"

"I appreciate the fact that you obviously try to see both sides of an issue, regardless of which side you end up supporting."

Kim Vickers,Texas Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and EducationGrits for Breakfast "has probably broken more criminal justice stories than any TX reporter, but stays under the radar. Fascinating guy."

Maurice Chammah,The Marshall Project"unrestrained and uneducated"

John Bradley,Former Williamson County District Attorney, now former Attorney General of Palau

"our favorite blog"

- Texas District and County Attorneys Association Twitter feed"Scott Henson ... writes his terrific blog Grits for Breakfast from an outhouse in Texas."